Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T06:22:29.129Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The hydroids Clava multicornis and Clava squamata

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

C. Edwards  and
S. M. Harvey
C. Edwards
Affiliation:
Dunstaffnage Marine Research Laboratory, P.O. Box 3, Oban, Argyll, Scotland PA34 4AD
S. M. Harvey
Affiliation:
Dunstaffnage Marine Research Laboratory, P.O. Box 3, Oban, Argyll, Scotland PA34 4AD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There is much variation in the form of colony assumed by the common hydroid Clava, and two forms were for long distinguished as separate species, a diffuse one found on stones and rocks in the lower part of the tidal zone and in shallow subtidal depths, with scattered polyps arising from an open hydrorhizal network of creeping stolons, and a clustered one, living on fucoid and other seaweeds in the tidal zone, with densely clustered polyps borne on a compact hydrorhizal base of very short anastomosing stolons. Johnston (1847) did not separate these forms and recognized one species only, named by priority Clava multicornis (Forskal, 1775). It was largely on the authoritative works of Hincks (1868) and Allman (1871–2) that the two forms became accepted as distinct species, the name Clava multicornis (Forskål) being adopted for the diffuse one (though Hincks admitted uncertainty in ascribing Forskål name to this) and Clava squamata (Müller, 1776) for the clustered one. More recently certain authors have considered them to be forms of one species, designated by priority Clava multicornis, but others have continued to treat them as separate species, and the question of their specific identity or distinctness cannot be said to have been resolved. Broch (1916, pp. 38–40), from a study of material from various localities, concluded that there are all transitional conditions between the two forms, rendering specific distinction impossible, and that they are evidently ecologically conditioned forms of one species. He did not, however, adduce any experimental or other evidence in support of his belief.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 55 , Issue 4 , November 1975 , pp. 879 - 886
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agassiz, L., 1862. Contributions to the natural history of the United States of America, vol. 4, 380 pp., pls 20–35. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Allman, G. J., 1859. Notes on the hydroid zoophytes. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (3), 4, 367–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allman, G. J., 1863. Notes on the Hydroida. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, (3), 11, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allman, G. J., 1871–2. A monograph of thegymnoblastic or tubularian hydroids. 450 pp. London: Ray Society.Google Scholar
Broch, H., 1916. Hydroida. Part I. Danish Ingolf-Expedition, 5, (6), 66 pp.Google Scholar
Bruce, J. R., Colman, J. S. & Jones, N. S., 1963. Marine fauna of the Isle of Man and its surrounding seas. Memoirs. Liverpool Marine Biological Committee, 36, 307 pp.Google Scholar
Crothers, J. H., 1966. Dale Fort marine fauna (2nd edn). Field Studies, 2, Supplement, 169 pp.Google Scholar
Ehrenberg, C. G., 1834. Beitrage zur physiologischen Kenntniss der Corallenthiere im Allgemeinen und besonders des Rothen Meeres. Abhandlungen der Koniglichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1832, 225–380.Google Scholar
Forskål, P., 1775. Descriptiones animalium avium, amphibiorum, piscium, insectorum, vermium; quae in itinere orientali observavit Petrus Forskål. Post mortem auctoris edidit Carsten Niebuhr. 164 pp. Hauniae.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forskål, P., 1776. Icones rerum naturalium, quas in itinere orientali depingi curavit Petrus Forskål. Post mortem auctoris ad regis mandatum aeri incisas edidit Carsten Niebuhr. 43 pls. Hauniae.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gmelin, J. F., 1790. See Linnaeus C., 1790.Google Scholar
Hincks, T., 1868. A history of the British hydroid zoophytes. Vol. 1, 338 pp. vol. 2, 67 pls. London: John van Voorst.Google Scholar
Johnston, G., 1838. A history of the British zoophytes. 341 pp. Edinburgh: W. H. Lizars.Google Scholar
Johnston, G., 1847. A history of the British zoophytes. 2nd edn. Vol. 1, 488 pp.; Vol. 2, 74 pls. London: John van Voorst.Google Scholar
Lamarck, J. B. P. A.De, De M., 1816. Histoire naturelle des Animaux sans vertebrés, présentant les caracteres généraux et particuliers des ces Animaux. Vol. 2. Paris.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C., 1790. Systema naturae. 13th Edition, revised and edited by Gmelin, J. F., vol. 1 (6), 3021–910. Lipsiae.Google Scholar
Lönnberg, E., 1898. Clava glomerata mihi, eine anscheinend neue Hydroide. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 22, 45–6.Google Scholar
Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 1957. Plymouth Marine Fauna. 3rd edn. 457 pp. Plymouth.Google Scholar
Müller, O. F., 1776. Zoologiae Danicae prodromus seu animalium Daniae et Norvegiae indigenarium characteres, nomina, et synonyma imprimis popularium. 282 pp. Hauniae.Google Scholar
Müller, O. F., 1779. Zoologia Danica, seu Animalium Daniae et Norvegiae rariorum ac minus notorum descriptiones et historia. Vol. 1 and Plates. Hauniae et Lipsiae.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naumov, D. V., 1960. Gidroidy i gidromeduzy morskikh solonovatovodnykh i presnovodnykh basseinov SSSR. Opredeliteli po faune SSSR, izdavaemye Zoologicheskim muzeem Akademii Nauk, 70, 626 pp.Google Scholar
Robins, M. W., 1969. The marine flora and fauna of the Isles of Scilly: Cnidaria and Ctenophora. Journal of Natural History, 3, 329–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stechow, E., 1927. Die Hydroidenfauna der Ostsee. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 70, 304–13.Google Scholar
Thiel, H., 1962. Untersuchungen über die Strobilisation von Aurelia aurita Lam. an einer Population der Kieler Förde. Kieler Meeresforschungen, 18, 198–230.Google Scholar
Thiel, H., 1970. Beobachtungen an den Hydroiden der Kieler Bucht. Bericht der Deutschen wissenschaftlichen Kommission fur Meeresforschung, 21, 474–93.Google Scholar
Vervoort, W., 1946. Hydrozoa (CI). A. Hydropolypen. Fauna van Nederland, 14, 336 pp.Google Scholar
Wright, T. Strethill, 1857. Observations on British Zoophytes. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, 1, 226–37, pls. 11, 12.Google Scholar
Wright, T. Strethill, 1862. Observations on British Zoophytes and Protozoa. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, 2, 378–81.Google Scholar